A Message Header to Identify Subscription Form Mail
draft-levine-mailbomb-header-00
This document is an Internet-Draft (I-D).
Anyone may submit an I-D to the IETF.
This I-D is not endorsed by the IETF and has no formal standing in the
IETF standards process.
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Expired".
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | John R. Levine | ||
| Last updated | 2017-06-19 | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-levine-mailbomb-header-00
Network Working Group J. Levine
Internet-Draft Taughannock Networks
Updates: 6376 (if approved) June 18, 2017
Intended status: Informational
Expires: December 20, 2017
A Message Header to Identify Subscription Form Mail
draft-levine-mailbomb-header-00
Abstract
Many organizations have web forms that provoke an e-mail confirmation
to the e-mail address provided in the form. Malicious entities do
bulk form submissions with forged addresses, resulting in mail floods
to the holders of those addresses. This document defines a message
header to identify mail sent in response to web forms, so that
recipient mail systems can better recognize and mitigate the mail
floods.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 20, 2017.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
Levine Expires December 20, 2017 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft June 2017
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. The Form-Sub header field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Mail flood enhanced status code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6.1. Provisional Message Header Registry . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6.2. Enhanced Status Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8.2. URIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1. Introduction
Discussion Venue: For the time being, discussion about this draft
is directed to the collaboration@mailman.m3aawg.org [1] mailing
list.
Many organizations have web forms that provoke an e-mail confirmation
to the e-mail address provided in the form. Malicious entities sbmit
multiple forms with forged addresses, resulting in mail floods to
those addresses. We define a message header that identifies mail
sent in response to web forms, so that recipient mail systems can
better recognize and mitigate the mail floods.
Mail systems that recognize a mail flood may defer or reject the
mail. We also define an SMTP enhanced status code that a mail system
can use in a message rejection SMTP reponse to alert the sending
system that the message was rejected due to being part of a mail
flood.
2. Conventions
The terms Message Submission Agent (MSA) and Message Transfer Agent
(MTA) are defined as in [RFC5598].
The ABNF [RFC5234] terms CRLF, FWS, and fields are imported from
[RFC5322].
Levine Expires December 20, 2017 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft June 2017
3. The Form-Sub header field
A MSA or an initial MTA adds a Form-Sub header field to indicate that
the message was sent in response to a web form submission. The
header consists of a semicolon-separated list of tag=value pairs.
The first tag-value pair is "v=1" to indicate that the header uses
the initial version of this specification. Subsequent tag-value
pairs are optional, and receivers should ignore pairs with unknown
tags.
The tags ip4 or ip6 contain the IPv4 or IPv6 address, respectively,
from which the web form was submitted. The address may be partially
redacted for privacy reasons, by replacing groups of digits with the
letter "x", for example, 198.51.x.x or 2001:DB8::x or
x::1234:abcd:5678:ef01. If the sender cannot determine the
submitting IP address, it can include "ip=none". The goal of
including the IP address is to help receiving mail systems recognize
when a cluster of messages was provoked by the same submitter.
ABNF:
fields =/ "Form-Sub:" FWS "v=1" *(FWS ";" FWS fsarg) CRLF
fsarg = "ip4=" ip4redacted
ip4redacted = IPv4 address with parts optionally replaced by "x"
fsarg =/ "ip6=" ip6redacted
ip6redacted = IPv6 address with parts optionally replaced by "x"
fsarg =/ "ip=none"
The Form-Sub header should be included within the set of the headers
signed by any DKIM [RFC6376] signature headers.
4. Mail flood enhanced status code
A mail receiver may choose to defer or reject mail that it recognizes
as part of a mail flood. It can include the enhanced status code
X.7.TBD to indicate that the rejection is due to the message being
part of a mail flood that includes Form-Sub headers.
5. Security Considerations
IP addresses are sometimes considered to be personally identifable
information. This specification allows partially redacted addresses
as a compromise to avoid identifying individual persons, while still
providing receivers a hint to recognize bulk submissions by the same
party.
Levine Expires December 20, 2017 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft June 2017
The Form-Sub header discloses information from a sender to a
receiver, and the X.7.TBD enhanced status code discloses information
from a receiver to a sender that they would not otherwise have. If
one party suspects the other is malicious, e.g., a receiver fears
that a sender is probing to see what its mail volume limits are, it
might not include the header or the status code for the possibly
malicious other party.
6. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to update registries as follows.
6.1. Provisional Message Header Registry
The following value is added to the Provisional Message Header
Registry
+------------------+----------+----------+--------+-----------------+
| Header Field | Template | Protocol | Status | Reference |
| name | | | | |
+------------------+----------+----------+--------+-----------------+
| Form-Sub | . | mail | . | (this document) |
+------------------+----------+----------+--------+-----------------+
Table 1: Provisional Message Header Registry Added Value
6.2. Enhanced Status Codes
The following value is added to the Enhanced Status Codes Enumerated
Status Codes Registry
Levine Expires December 20, 2017 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft June 2017
+------+-------+--------+----------+--------+--------+--------------+
| Code | Sampl | Associ | Descript | Refere | Submit | Change |
| | e | ated | ion | nce | ter | Controller |
| | Text | Basic | | | | |
| | | Status | | | | |
| | | Code | | | | |
+------+-------+--------+----------+--------+--------+--------------+
| X.7. | Mail | The me | . | [this | J. | standards@ta |
| TBD | flood | ssage | | docume | Levine | ugh.com |
| | detec | appear | | nt] | | |
| | ted | s to | | | | |
| | | be | | | | |
| | | part | | | | |
| | | of a | | | | |
| | | mail | | | | |
| | | flood | | | | |
| | | of sim | | | | |
| | | ilar a | | | | |
| | | busive | | | | |
| | | messag | | | | |
| | | es. | | | | |
+------+-------+--------+----------+--------+--------+--------------+
Table 2: Enunerated Status Codes Registry Added Value
7. Acknowledgments
Kurt Andersen and the M3AAWG Collaboration Committee provided the
good parts.
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[RFC5234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5234, January 2008,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5234>.
[RFC5322] Resnick, P., Ed., "Internet Message Format", RFC 5322,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5322, October 2008,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5322>.
[RFC5598] Crocker, D., "Internet Mail Architecture", RFC 5598,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5598, July 2009,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5598>.
Levine Expires December 20, 2017 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft June 2017
[RFC6376] Crocker, D., Ed., Hansen, T., Ed., and M. Kucherawy, Ed.,
"DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) Signatures", STD 76,
RFC 6376, DOI 10.17487/RFC6376, September 2011,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6376>.
8.2. URIs
[1] mailto:collaboration@mailman.m3aawg.org
Author's Address
John Levine
Taughannock Networks
PO Box 727
Trumansburg, NY 14886
Phone: +1 831 480 2300
Email: standards@taugh.com
Levine Expires December 20, 2017 [Page 6]